Re: [Review - Not yet] aterm-0.4.2-1 - vt102 terminal emulator, based on rxvt
On Fri, 5 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote: Charles Wilson wrote: Harold L Hunt II wrote: You have a dependency in setup.hint on 'cygipc2'. There is no such package, it is called 'cygipc'. Also, any *new* packages, IMO, should not rely on cygipc at all. Instead, they should be compiled against cygserver, which beats the pants off cygipc any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. He is only dependent upon cygipc because Cygwin/X is dependent upon it and has not yet been rebuilt against cygserver. Then it shouldn't be included at all, according to http://cygwin.com/setup.html: Conversely, do not include package dependencies of dependent packages in your dependency list. If you think that another package has an incorrect dependency list, send email to cygwin-apps noting that fact. HTH, Igor I have been waiting to do this rebuild until I release the new Cygwin/X build from the xorg tree on freedesktop.org. I am gearing up to do this... possibly next week as a sort of 1.0pre-1 release since the official 1.0 release won't be made for at least a few weeks. When I do that rebuild it will be against cygserver and cygipc will be dropped as a dependency. Harold -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster. -- Patrick Naughton
Re: [Review - Not yet] aterm-0.4.2-1 - vt102 terminal emulator, based on rxvt
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote: Jari, You have a dependency in setup.hint on 'cygipc2'. There is no such package, it is called 'cygipc'. You also have a dependency on 'xfree86-base'. Note that the package name is 'XFree86-base'. This should be fixed for consistency. Did you actually try to use this package? I ran it from and xterm and it didn't echo typed characters and printed escape sequences for the shell prompt instead of readable characters. It performed similarly from a command prompt. Launching from both an xterm and from the command prompt resulted in aterm using 100% of the CPU. Unless you tested this and these are minor and easily fixable problems, then I am going to actually ask you to revoke you ITP since there is no way that this package can be included with the above shell and infinite loop problems. Harold Harold, If aterm is based on rxvt, it probably runs /bin/sh rather than /bin/bash (which would explain the escape sequence problem above). The solution for rxvt (which should also help here) is to run rxvt -e bash. I agree that the other problems are pretty much showstoppers. It would have helped if you mentioned at least the version of Windows that you tried it on, though (I assume you have the latest packages installed). Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster. -- Patrick Naughton
Re: [Review - Not yet] aterm-0.4.2-1 - vt102 terminal emulator, based on rxvt
Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote: If aterm is based on rxvt, it probably runs /bin/sh rather than /bin/bash (which would explain the escape sequence problem above). The solution for rxvt (which should also help here) is to run rxvt -e bash. I agree that the other problems are pretty much showstoppers. It would have helped if you mentioned at least the version of Windows that you tried it on, though (I assume you have the latest packages installed). In the interest of not writing overly long emails (which I find people tend to ignore), I decided to not even mention that I tried other shells since describing the slight difference in behavior wouldn't really matter since it goes into an infinite loop. aterm -e /bin/bash behaves only slightly differently. The version of Windows I am running doesn't matter unless Jari can't reproduce the problem, in which case he can ask what version I have; until then it would just be noise. Harold
Re: [Review - Not yet] aterm-0.4.2-1 - vt102 terminal emulator, based on rxvt
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote: Igor Pechtchanski wrote: On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Harold L Hunt II wrote: If aterm is based on rxvt, it probably runs /bin/sh rather than /bin/bash (which would explain the escape sequence problem above). The solution for rxvt (which should also help here) is to run rxvt -e bash. I agree that the other problems are pretty much showstoppers. It would have helped if you mentioned at least the version of Windows that you tried it on, though (I assume you have the latest packages installed). In the interest of not writing overly long emails (which I find people tend to ignore), I decided to not even mention that I tried other shells since describing the slight difference in behavior wouldn't really matter since it goes into an infinite loop. aterm -e /bin/bash behaves only slightly differently. The above was meant as more of an academic comment. If you think the escape sequences problem is trivial compared to the hangs (with which I actually agree), you probably shouldn't have mentioned it. Having mentioned it, and not having said that you've tried aterm -e /bin/bash, you opened yourself up for the above guess... :-) BTW, using bash rather than sh was only supposed to help the escape sequence problem, and nothing else (did it?). The version of Windows I am running doesn't matter unless Jari can't reproduce the problem, in which case he can ask what version I have; until then it would just be noise. Harold Allow me to disagree. Reporting your Windows version lets Jari know that either the program misbehaves on some version he hasn't tried, or that something in your setup is different. I sincerely hope he actually tested the package executables on his machine, in which case it would be a given that he can't reproduce it. Having him ask you for a version will generate much more mailing list traffic than including the version in the original problem report in the first place, IMHO. And with this I'll conclude this overly long off-topic e-mail that people are free to ignore. :-) Igor -- http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/ |\ _,,,---,,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] ZZZzz /,`.-'`'-. ;-;;,_[EMAIL PROTECTED] |,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D. '---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow! I have since come to realize that being between your mentor and his route to the bathroom is a major career booster. -- Patrick Naughton
Re: [Review - Not yet] aterm-0.4.2-1 - vt102 terminal emulator, based on rxvt
Harold L Hunt II wrote: You have a dependency in setup.hint on 'cygipc2'. There is no such package, it is called 'cygipc'. Also, any *new* packages, IMO, should not rely on cygipc at all. Instead, they should be compiled against cygserver, which beats the pants off cygipc any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. -- Chuck
Re: [Review - Not yet] aterm-0.4.2-1 - vt102 terminal emulator, based on rxvt
Charles Wilson wrote: Harold L Hunt II wrote: You have a dependency in setup.hint on 'cygipc2'. There is no such package, it is called 'cygipc'. Also, any *new* packages, IMO, should not rely on cygipc at all. Instead, they should be compiled against cygserver, which beats the pants off cygipc any day of the week, and twice on Sunday. He is only dependent upon cygipc because Cygwin/X is dependent upon it and has not yet been rebuilt against cygserver. I have been waiting to do this rebuild until I release the new Cygwin/X build from the xorg tree on freedesktop.org. I am gearing up to do this... possibly next week as a sort of 1.0pre-1 release since the official 1.0 release won't be made for at least a few weeks. When I do that rebuild it will be against cygserver and cygipc will be dropped as a dependency. Harold
